Today's New York Times reports that two 17-year-old handball champions were disqualified from the Public Schools Athletic League handball championship "because they had entered a tournament that awarded cash prizes, which is against league rules."

In chess, as in handball, one becomes a better player by facing stronger opponents. I don't like teenagers playing games for money. But I think the definition of "amateur" needs to be re-examined by the Illinois High School Association and Chicago Public Schools. Merely competing against non-amateurs should not jeopardize one's amateur status. In my opinion, it's reasonable to ban students from accepting prizes.

Organizers can help (and possibly help their profit margins) by offering amateur entry fees to their events. If a high school kid can't accept a $5,000 prize, then why should that kid have to pay $200+ to enter the event?

So what was I thinking yesterday when I played 18...Ng4!? in the position below? Yes, taking on f2 with check is threatened, but there is no mate, and it seems that White could play 19.dxc6 "for free." Don't let Rybka decide for you: use your noggin. Post the critical variation(s) in the comments.

In the post-mortem, my genial opponent (a NM from Virginia) and I suspected that the move was possibly not the best, but definitely the most fun to play in the last round.

So does the Chicago Open winner prefer the English transliteration "Gareev" (per Wikipedia, which is never wrong, and by analogy with Russian supergrandmaster Bareev) or Gareyev (per USCF)? Nice article by Jamaal Abdul-Alim at Chess Life Online with several key games.